One thing that pisses me off about Fire Emblem is that enemies just randomly pop up from the side of the map with absolutely no warning AND they can move and attack on the same turn. So you have no reaction time. Chapter 7, 3 wyvern knights just come out of nowhere from the side of the map and since they have a huge range, they just gang up on the weakest guy nearby. Wtf is this cheap ass shit, give the players some warning or a turn to change unit positioning

I'm used to no backwards compatibility from the ps3, but no backwards compatibility for the psn games? I hope they fix that with whatever they were talking about in that article.

I like the idea of getting to play the game as it is downloading. Especially on my psp, games can take a while to download. I also have to steal my neighbor's wifi because the psp won't connect to our wifi, so I usually have to hold my psp for it to get a good enough connection. I'd be more willing to hold it if I could play it.

Y'know, I've been wanting to get back into some Sony gaming recently. Some great franchises I wanna play; Uncharted, Ratchet and Clank, Sly Cooper etc. I might end up buying an old PS3 in a few years instead of a PS4 unless I become super rich somehow.

Y'know, I've been wanting to get back into some Sony gaming recently. Some great franchises I wanna play; Uncharted, Ratchet and Clank, Sly Cooper etc. I might end up buying an old PS3 in a few years instead of a PS4 unless I become super rich somehow.

PS4 won't keep your PSN digital titles or play PS3 games. These are my favorite days, the ones right after the conference, when all that bad news just trickles out. People should be pissed off about this, but it seems like most in the Sony camp are just "eh, expected it anyways".

Thank you, Steam.

Click to expand...

I didn't expect this, honestly. I thought Sony was smarter than this. This is likely a deal-breaker for me.

Uncharted was awesome, although U3 was a bit lacking. U2 multiplayer was so much fun, I think it's my most played game ever besides maybe Pokemon Crystal. Even though the online community is probably down to 10%, I'd still play the second game for the single player campaign. Also really interested in the new inFamous, but I'm kinda sad Cole isn't the main star... eh

Uncharted (at least 1&2) were not to my liking. Weak ass gunplay, terrible enemy twists at the Chapter 17-ish marks, and really frustrating moments pushed me away from ever trying 3. It's cool if the game did want you wanted to; Drake could jump over this, slash through that, bust down that. But you could tell once you stepped outside the games little box your character just would not function.

Uncharted 2's multiplayer was awesome, much better than Uncharted 3's if you ask me.

I'm surprised I liked Uncharted as much as I did, considering the game engine frequently had Drake do something you didn't want to (press up against the wrong wall, jump off a wall in the wrong direction, etc).

Ratchet and Clank and Sly Cooper are both good series, but Uncharted is shit.

Click to expand...

The Uncharted games do have their flaws, but I would never call them shit. If the series were handled by anyone other than Naughty Dog, it probably wouldn't work, but those guys really know how to craft a smooth action gaming experience. None of the games are particularly deep or challenging by any stretch of the mind, but what is there is done exceptionally well.

I wouldn't call a botched control scheme, pisspoor gunplay (nothing better than shooting the wall that you're using for cover), and moving from set piece to set piece features of a "smooth action gaming experience" or those of an exceptionally well-done game. That's not to mention the moments where it seems like everything's working and then suddenly it doesn't and you don't have a clue why.

Toss those in with a game that doesn't really have a whole lot going for it to begin with outside of its story and characters and you have a shit game.

I wouldn't call a botched control scheme, pisspoor gunplay (nothing better than shooting the wall that you're using for cover), and moving from set piece to set piece features of a "smooth action gaming experience" or those of an exceptionally well-done game. That's not to mention the moments where it seems like everything's working and then suddenly it doesn't and you don't have a clue why.

Toss those in with a game that doesn't really have a whole lot going for it to begin with outside of its story and characters and you have a shit game.

Click to expand...

I'm not trying to argue with you, or 'prove you wrong', but have you played through the Uncharted series? Because if you think it's such a shit game, why would you play it?

One thing that pisses me off about Fire Emblem is that enemies just randomly pop up from the side of the map with absolutely no warning AND they can move and attack on the same turn. So you have no reaction time. Chapter 7, 3 wyvern knights just come out of nowhere from the side of the map and since they have a huge range, they just gang up on the weakest guy nearby. Wtf is this cheap ass shit, give the players some warning or a turn to change unit positioning

Click to expand...

That didn't use to be the case. In the ones I've played, reinforcements usually showed up at the end of a turn so you could move your units and everything.

One thing that pisses me off about Fire Emblem is that enemies just randomly pop up from the side of the map with absolutely no warning AND they can move and attack on the same turn. So you have no reaction time. Chapter 7, 3 wyvern knights just come out of nowhere from the side of the map and since they have a huge range, they just gang up on the weakest guy nearby. Wtf is this cheap ass shit, give the players some warning or a turn to change unit positioning

Click to expand...

That didn't use to be the case. In the ones I've played, reinforcements usually showed up at the end of a turn so you could move your units and everything.

Click to expand...

Nah, it's happened in the first GBA one, (and I want to say PoR too). Only on a few levels, but it happens. The one that comes to mind is that if you go past a boundary on the pirate level (the "game"), a boss shows up out of nowhere and attacks you on the very same turn. It was the most WTF thing that had happened in a long time.

One thing that pisses me off about Fire Emblem is that enemies just randomly pop up from the side of the map with absolutely no warning AND they can move and attack on the same turn. So you have no reaction time. Chapter 7, 3 wyvern knights just come out of nowhere from the side of the map and since they have a huge range, they just gang up on the weakest guy nearby. Wtf is this cheap ass shit, give the players some warning or a turn to change unit positioning

Click to expand...

That didn't use to be the case. In the ones I've played, reinforcements usually showed up at the end of a turn so you could move your units and everything.

Click to expand...

Nah, it's happened in the first GBA one, (and I want to say PoR too). Only on a few levels, but it happens. The one that comes to mind is that if you go past a boundary on the pirate level (the "game"), a boss shows up out of nowhere and attacks you on the very same turn. It was the most WTF thing that had happened in a long time.

Click to expand...

Oh yeah, that level.

He was a shitty boss as long as you didn't get smoked with a crit though. Only thing is that you need to go through him to get to the Arena and break the game (like I did by maxing Raven & Sain, while also getting Priscilla's level stupidly high along with Rebecca's).

That didn't use to be the case. In the ones I've played, reinforcements usually showed up at the end of a turn so you could move your units and everything.

Click to expand...

Nah, it's happened in the first GBA one, (and I want to say PoR too). Only on a few levels, but it happens. The one that comes to mind is that if you go past a boundary on the pirate level (the "game"), a boss shows up out of nowhere and attacks you on the very same turn. It was the most WTF thing that had happened in a long time.

Click to expand...

Oh yeah, that level.

He was a shitty boss as long as you didn't get smoked with a crit though. Only thing is that you need to go through him to get to the Arena and break the game (like I did by maxing Raven & Sain, while also getting Priscilla's level stupidly high along with Rebecca's).

Click to expand...

I just was not expecting it and he left Raven with like 2 HP. Thankfully though, Hector was more than capable of handling that corner by himself.

I wouldn't call a botched control scheme, pisspoor gunplay (nothing better than shooting the wall that you're using for cover), and moving from set piece to set piece features of a "smooth action gaming experience" or those of an exceptionally well-done game. That's not to mention the moments where it seems like everything's working and then suddenly it doesn't and you don't have a clue why.

Toss those in with a game that doesn't really have a whole lot going for it to begin with outside of its story and characters and you have a shit game.

Click to expand...

"Smooth" doesn't exactly mean perfect. In fact, when gameplay is too smooth it loses precision, which is one of the main problems with Uncharted. The way Nate controls gets more sloppy with each game, but it's sloppy in a smooth way. The animation in particular makes it work like that. In my experiences with Uncharted, I've been able to ignore the occasional inconsistencies, solely because I like the way the gameplay feels. Besides, I don't really play Uncharted games for the combat. I mostly enjoy the characters, cinematic feel, visuals, scope, atmosphere, etc. When most people praise the Uncharted games, they point out the crazy action sequences from 2 and 3, but I actually prefer when the pacing slows down. (the deserted lab in U1, exploring the village in U2, and the desert in U3)

Don't get me wrong, you make really good points as to why Uncharted should be a shit series, I just don't think it is.
The combat is sloppy, but I still enjoy it.
The climbing is lazy, but I still enjoy it.
The plot is oftentimes cheesy, but I still enjoy it.
The puzzles are easy as balls, but I still enjoy them.

It looks like Naughty Dog is going for something deeper and more survival-oriented with The Last of Us, so maybe they've finally learned what was wrong with Uncharted. Maybe.

^I enjoy Metal Gear Solid in the same way. When I 'remember' MGS, it's definitely for the characters, story, atmosphere, etc. But never the action gameplay. MGS games don't really have the best gameplay, but that never bothered me.

^I enjoy Metal Gear Solid in the same way. When I 'remember' MGS, it's definitely for the characters, story, atmosphere, etc. But never the action gameplay. MGS games don't really have the best gameplay, but that never bothered me.

Click to expand...

I disagree about the gameplay. Metal Gear gameplay has always been really fun for me, especially in the 2D games, MGS4, and Peace Walker.

Still, while I think MGS1 is the weakest in terms of gameplay, I adore the story, characters, and atmosphere. It's those aspects of the game that make it my favorite in the series.

^I enjoy Metal Gear Solid in the same way. When I 'remember' MGS, it's definitely for the characters, story, atmosphere, etc. But never the action gameplay. MGS games don't really have the best gameplay, but that never bothered me.

Click to expand...

I disagree about the gameplay. Metal Gear gameplay has always been really fun for me, especially in the 2D games, MGS4, and Peace Walker.

Still, while I think MGS1 is the weakest in terms of gameplay, I adore the story, characters, and atmosphere. It's those aspects of the game that make it my favorite in the series.

Click to expand...

Yeah I think the gameplay of MGS4 really helped boost the replay value of the game. And MGO was damn fun...some of the time.

I definitely agree about MGS1. And while MGS3 does have fun gameplay, such as The End fight, the characters are without a doubt the highlight of that game.

PS4 won't keep your PSN digital titles or play PS3 games. These are my favorite days, the ones right after the conference, when all that bad news just trickles out. People should be pissed off about this, but it seems like most in the Sony camp are just "eh, expected it anyways".

Thank you, Steam.

Click to expand...

I didn't expect this, honestly. I thought Sony was smarter than this. This is likely a deal-breaker for me.

Click to expand...

They will release some patch or something like that which will allow PS3 and PSN titles to be played on the console. They always do.

They will release some patch or something like that which will allow PS3 and PSN titles to be played on the console. They always do.

Click to expand...

No, they'll just charge you for the Cloud version of it to stream to your console. Then when the PS5 comes out they'll give up on that and move to something else where you have to pay again for your favorite PS4 games to play on your new console. Repeat until death.

No, they'll just charge you for the Cloud version of it to stream to your console. Then when the PS5 comes out they'll give up on that and move to something else where you have to pay again for your favorite PS4 games to play on your new console. Repeat until death.

Click to expand...

In some ways I wonder if this was entirely Sony's decision, or if there was also a lot of demand from third parties to milk more money from consumers.

They will release some patch or something like that which will allow PS3 and PSN titles to be played on the console. They always do.

Click to expand...

No, they'll just charge you for the Cloud version of it to stream to your console. Then when the PS5 comes out they'll give up on that and move to something else where you have to pay again for your favorite PS4 games to play on your new console. Repeat until death.

No, they'll just charge you for the Cloud version of it to stream to your console. Then when the PS5 comes out they'll give up on that and move to something else where you have to pay again for your favorite PS4 games to play on your new console. Repeat until death.

Click to expand...

In some ways I wonder if this was entirely Sony's decision, or if there was also a lot of demand from third parties to milk more money from consumers.

Click to expand...

i wouldnt doubt it.. hell.. i wouldnt be surprised if sony AND microsoft got together and discussed a plan like this.. not for a second.. and while it does suck.. i can see why companies would want to go this way.. with every used game they sell or old data they let transfer over.. they lose out on a hard sale of a new piece of hardware or product.. the more new units sold.. the more sony and microsoft make money.. makes perfect sense..

i just wonder what this means for gamestop.. and brick and mortar stores like it.. especially with the rumor being that the 720 will not play used games AT ALL.. *shrugs* ..

my rumor mill churns that microsoft will attempt to go more like PC games with an activation code.. one time use of course.. which would require both the code and the disc to play.. thats a couple a nails down pretty good and deep for gamestop if they do..

What is the practical use of blocking used games? If the rumours are true, it just shows that Microsoft doesn't give a shit about their fans. Why the hell shouldn't I be allowed to trade games with my friends? Wal-Mart is the only place in driving distance that I can buy games, and they don't exactly have the greatest selection.

I think, for those of you who might, for whatever reason, be wondering why the board's as dead as it is, you can refer to the way newcomers and perceived newcomers are treated here and you'll have your answer. There's plenty of material to read from the last few weeks.

my rumor mill churns that microsoft will attempt to go more like PC games with an activation code.. one time use of course.. which would require both the code and the disc to play.. thats a couple a nails down pretty good and deep for gamestop if they do..

but thats just the rumor..

e3 will answer all..

Click to expand...

They'll leave that news for the day after E3, when all the stuff we don't want to hear gets filtered to the media.

Used games eat away at developer sales, as Gamespot or wheover are the ones making the money. Microsoft would do this to cut out the middle man, thus making third parties happy, yadda yadda blah blah. It makes sense from a business standpoint, but since we know Sony isn't going this route I doubt Microsoft will. Those two will continue to mirror each other and try not to have that one big fuck up that turns people away. Used games would be a huge blow to the fanbase.

Only good part about baseball season starting is that the Houston Astros finally moved to the AL West and I can no longer be a fan of them. Going up against my (equally as bad) Seattle Mariners means I cut my adopted city alliance. THANK GOD.

The whole problem with all this used games business is they think every used game sold equals a lost sale, when that's not the case at all. Many of the people who buy used games are people who were never going to pay full price for the game to begin with. The same line of logic applies to piracy as well.

Only good part about baseball season starting is that the Houston Astros finally moved to the AL West and I can no longer be a fan of them. Going up against my (equally as bad) Seattle Mariners means I cut my adopted city alliance. THANK GOD.

Click to expand...

Ouch, Sean, I didn't know you liked all Seattle teams. Well, actually, it's probably a good time to be a Seattle fan. New basketball team is likely, Seahawks should probably be favored to win the Super Bowl soon, Mariners can't possibly be that bad every year, blah blah blah. Also Sounders.